Varanasi: Waqf board plea on Gyanwapi dispute admitted by dist court, hearing on November 12

The Central Sunni Waqf Board had filed the revision plea in the court on September 18, pleading that the case was related to the waqf tribunal and therefore it should be heard by Lucknow Waqf court.
The Kashi Vishwanath temple in Varanasi (Photo | EPS)
The Kashi Vishwanath temple in Varanasi (Photo | EPS)

LUCKNOW:  Varanasi district court has admitted the revision petition of Uttar Pradesh Central Sunni Waqf Board (UPCSWB) in the case of the Kashi Vishwanath Temple-Gyanvapi mosque dispute, and fixed the next date of hearing on November 12.

The Central Sunni Waqf Board had filed the revision petition in the court on September 18, pleading that the case was related to the waqf tribunal and therefore it should be heard by Lucknow Waqf court.

After hearing the plea on October 20, the court of the district judge Umesh Chandra Sharma had reserved the verdict and fixed the date on October 22. Accepting the plea of the Central Sunni Waqf Board, the court will now hear the case on November 12.

Earlier, in December last year, a civil court had admitted a petition filed for the restoration of land on which the Gyanwapi mosque is situated to Kashi Vishwanath temple trust and removal of the mosque.

In December 2019, advocate Vijay Shankar Rastogi on behalf of Swayambhu Jyotirlinga Bhagwan Vishweshwar had filed an application in the court of civil judge, requesting for a survey of the entire Gyanvapi compound by the Archeological Survey of India (ASI).

He had filed the petition as the next friend of the deity Swayambhu Jyotirlinga Bhagwan Vishweshwar. Later in January 2020, the Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee had filed an objection in the court against the petition.

In 1998, Anjuman Intezamia Masajid moved the High Court with the contention that the mandir-masjid dispute could not be adjudicated by a civil court as it was barred by the law. The court stayed the proceedings at the lower court which continued for the past 22 years. In February this year, the petitioners
approached the lower court again with a plea to resume the hearing as the HC had not extended the stay in the past six months.

Related Stories

No stories found.

X
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com